Nikon 35 f/1.8 Pics (and CA q's as well)

shivaswrath · Mar 22, 2009

Just took these on my D40x today - with the new lens, was somewhat cloudy in Rye, NY today. I know some discussion has been had about CA, but was wondering what everyone thought below. All were shot at ISO 200, Auto WB, Aperture priority (f/1.8 the in all shots).

I have a Tiffen UV filter on for now (waiting for the Nikon Clear one to arrive), so not sure if that is exacerbating the blue-ish ness around some of the tree-branches:

and these were some random geese that were pissed off - cracked me up!

abraxas · Mar 23, 2009

A place to discuss what photography means to you: your influences, ethical challenges, abstract ideas, and other non-technical matters about photography and photographers.

.

shivaswrath · Mar 23, 2009

woops, admin, please move to the appr location - my bad!

JerryPH · Mar 23, 2009

And while you are at it... post a reason why you are showing the pics... is it CC, your fringing issues, just looking for info or a pat on the back.

Sw1tchFX · Mar 23, 2009

It's because you're shooting at f/1.8.

Any lens is going to do that.

shivaswrath · Mar 23, 2009

Sorry - yes, posting them for feedback on the bluishness I'm seeing in the bokeh areas. . .lol, not a pat on the back, these were casual, non-PS'ed, poorly composed pics (I didn't even crop the junk out!), it was just something I noticed and didn't know if I should shoot at slower f-stops. . .

Sw1tchFX - have you seen this with other lenses as well, because when I have shot my 50mm 1.4G at f/1.4, I haven't seen this on my D40x. . .wish I had shot with it for comparison purposes. . .

Garbz · Mar 24, 2009

CA on many large aperture lenses is horrible. It's a feature that is most present on the sides of a lens. Unless you find some weird and wonderful lenses with aspherical elements like a Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2, it's the price you pay for wonderful depth of field.

Stopping down to even f/2 should greatly help. f/2.8 you shouldn't see the problems at all anymore.

shivaswrath · Mar 24, 2009

Interesting, so I'll stop down for sure now, esp during the day when the CA is most obvious.

I have heard the newer bodies (D90, D300, etc.) have a built in CA correction - how does that work then when you use a lens wide open?

JerryPH · Mar 24, 2009

Garbz said:
Unless you find some weird and wonderful lenses with aspherical elements like a Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2, it's the price you pay for wonderful depth of field.

I was looking around for that lens... best price so far was like $3500... a little too rich for me. If I can get one for about $1800-$2000, that would be sweet.

JerryPH · Mar 24, 2009

shivaswrath said:
Interesting, so I'll stop down for sure now, esp during the day when the CA is most obvious.

I have heard the newer bodies (D90, D300, etc.) have a built in CA correction - how does that work then when you use a lens wide open?

Did you check your manual for that?
Also a lot of PPing software does CA correction too. I know for a fact that LightRoom, PS CS3 and CS4 have CA corrective options.

shivaswrath · Mar 24, 2009

JerryPH said:
Did you check your manual for that?
Also a lot of PPing software does CA correction too. I know for a fact that LightRoom, PS CS3 and CS4 have CA corrective options.

Oh, I don't have either of those bodies, I heard that the newer DX bodies (and FX I assume) have it though. . .if PS3 has CA correction, I'll be fine, I'll just need to add it to the ever-growing list of things to learn on that damn thing. . .

Garbz · Mar 24, 2009

CA correction is something that happens in RAW processing and isn't really a camera feature. What I mean is if you get a D300 or D700 and shoot in RAW then you don't get the CA correction.